Search Results for "arbitrary date"

5479 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 5479 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Disposes of PIL and Writ Petition Challenging FSI Increase in Mumbai Suburbs under MRTP Act. Petitioners Contended Notifications Violated Article 14 and 21 and Amounted to Major Modification Not Permissible under Section 37 of MRTP Act.

This incomplete judgment text of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, concerns two petitions: Public Interest...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging Seniority List of Graduate High School Teachers — Directs Inclusion of Petitioner with Continuous Service from 1988. Sahitya Sudhakar Qualification Treated as Equivalent to Graduation for Seniority Purposes Under Zilla Parishad Service Rules.

The petitioner, Shri Jaiprakash Baburao Gaidhane, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the final seniority li...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of Stamp Duty for Unconsummated Transactions Under Section 49 of Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. Petitioner's applications for refund were within limitation period and refusal by authorities was arbitrary.

The petitioner, Vilas Eknath Nandgude, filed six writ petitions challenging orders dated 31 December 2019 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Re...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rejection of Candidature for Retail Outlet Dealership Due to Invalid Land Documents. Petitioner's land documents executed after application date were not valid, and her candidature could be considered under Group 3.

The petitioner, Meenakshi Rajkumar Sonawane, filed a writ petition challenging the communication dated 29.06.2019 by which her candidature for allotme...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...